Faction Rights

[Gallant]

Here's the way I see this issue.

Grab your coffee.

A Game Master is exactly that - he runs the game for a set amount of players. I don't claim to be the best Game Master in existence. I'm slow for posting. But when it comes to my plot, my story, I look at the setting elements that exist, talk to the people in charge of what I want to use, and then I somehow secure the rights to use those resources under advisement.

This is simply how I operate and I realize that other GMs do this differently. However, in my plot, I am king. I also control a small element of setting - the Tenth Fleet in Yamatai - and I actively encourage the few plots there are in their area of space to use them. I'll even play them if someone wants me to. But to me that is all it is - a setting. A thing which exists so that the GMs can give their players awesome stuff.

Now, let me contrast this with a Faction Manager who...

He has probably created a lot of setting material. He is the loremaster, like Volo was to Faerun. He gets to be creative, come up with material, spread it around enthusiastically. He's got a dream or a vision or a way that he thinks a certain faction ought to be that is so powerful he has a green name on the forums and can approve and disapprove setting material. He oversees the setting in the GM's plots and makes sure that everything that is written is written according to canon. Because that's what he works on.

The setting. And possibly some very prominant NPC's - when I think FM, I think like, Sigma, or Kokuten, or some of the other Nepleslian GMs who glance over people's plots and make sure they're not doing crazy stuff. Mostly they just grin and give you a thumbs-up unless you're doin something blatant and stupid.

So my face when this got brought up was wtf.jpg.

This isn't a tiered setup. It's not the military, though many of us are prior. The setting managers are important to maintain canon, and the game masters are important to drive plot. The last time I checked, maintaining setting integrity was flexible - but trying to have fun by writing was an absolute.

I don't think we need a codified set of laws. I haven't seen a single instance of GM/FM disharmony yet that hasn't been handled on a reasonable basis, overall, due to common sense and mutually wanting to give players a better story.

 

[Ira]

Good post, but the issue is actually not about GM/FM relations or it was not initially.

 

[Soresu]

For me the Faction Manager is the caretaker of Lore and Culture. Sure they should have some creative control over what they make. But not to the point it makes it wholly inaccessible to players and GMs or to scare them away from the idea. How I view FMing is thus:

As an FM I'd be more than happy to discuss factional involvement in a given plot. This ensures proper communication to help prevent stuff like this -Gesturing to the whole thread.- doesn't happen. Does this mean I'd be an ironfisted tight wad with my faction? No. It means I'm trying to ensure both parties get what they want. The GM their story, and me the recognition of my faction in an attempt to garner more players.

As an FM I'd very much like to be part of the creative process of the GM in telling their story. Not because I desire control, but so I can provide possible relevant information to help better the unfolding story and let the GM know they have someone that can assist them if they need help. Co-GM's usually fill this role, but an FM, being the creator of a given faction is also a great source of information. Plus, who knows? I may well enjoy watching this story play out!

As an FM would I worry about possible wars, and misuse of my material. To an extent, but not enough to overly worry me so long as I'm able to read what unfolds, and maybe even provide helpful hints if asked.

The bottom line is, GMs want one thing, some FMs want another. But what they both need is good communication between them and a healthy understanding of what it means to use any given idea. Some FMs will be protective, others won't, but I hope at the very least some would be willing to go along, and even help in the portrayal of their race in a plot. Since frankly, if it were the latter, it's a win-win scenario, FMs get factional recognition, and GMs get to spin a tale to entertain making this relationship symbiotic.

 

[Kyle]

Gallant and Soresu are right and falls in line with what Ira and I want; and to be honest, and this has been said 'multiple' times in the past. We don't mind our assets being used, we don't mind if GM's wants to play in the backyards of our factions, that doesn't bother us.

All we want, is to help ensure that the GM's have an understanding of how things operate within that factions enviroment, that things are not done that could potentially impact a faction in a way that could potentially kill that faction.

Bare in mind, this thread was never intended to make Ira, Myself or anyone else look like dictators (although I've been told that's what it made us look like, that is 'not' what the intention was).

In the grand scheme of things, Gm's and Fm's are equal, both actually want the same things.

Anywho, having talked with Ira and Wes, we agree that this rule set isn't needed and that they covered in the current set that already exists, although I have been told that they will be clarified so that they are understood better.

Again, this thread was not meant to start a war or bad blood, it was only meant to bring awareness to something we felt was a serious issue.

 

[Soresu]

No, No, No. I was trying to convey I'd be willing to help provide information regarding certain aspects while leaving the majority open ended. Like if they have technology questions, or some such. If they asked me how they'd react then I'd help there but otherwise I'd not say a word and let the GM do as they please so long as I can watch and help where needed.

I in no way was trying to say I want creative control, but to help if it was needed by providing useful information, not my views on how things should be done.

 

[CadetNewb]

All we want, is to help ensure that the GM's have an understanding of how things operate within that factions enviroment, that things are not done that could potentially impact a faction in a way that could potentially kill that faction.

I believe that this is more the crux of their entire movement more than anything else.

From my point of view, and that is the only one I believe I can provide for, is that their biggest worry is that a GM can take Faction assets and abuse them to Powergame in the form of NPCs and the like. I'm under the impression that the movement for our unspoken gentlemen's rules to be hard written and stated right where they can be seen by all is to expressly prevent this. I believe that it is their desire to openly state said rules and thereby prevent any malicious individuals from doing harm by explicit statement of rules, or to remind our well meaning members and GMs to ask FMs what is and is not acceptable when using Faction assets.

Looking back at the incident involving Yamatai, the Lorath, and the Gartagens, as well as the following incident with Yamatai and the Lorath (which required retconning a post), it was the latter. A well meaning post/action made for the express purpose of entertaining players, yet jimmy rustling for others. In the end, I believe that the proponents of this rule writing is to prevent such misunderstandings from arising in the first place by urging more conducive communication between GM's and FM's, not shackle one group or the other.

 

[Wes]

There's a lot of post for me to go through, so forgive me if I miss something.

Let's start with the existing policies of the site:

As shown, GMs are subordinates to their FMs.

Responsibilities of the Faction Manager include:

Overseeing consistency and continuity within his designated faction
Approving factional characters
Final authority controlling NPCs of the faction
Recruiting and approving factional plot Game Masters.
Ensuring factional compliance with the Military Buildup Limitations
Roleplaying the leadership and other NPCs of his faction as necessary
Designating an assistant and/or backup FM who can run his faction should the FM become indisposed

As indicated above, it is the FM's right to control their faction actively, and to be the last word on actions of NPCs (eg the ability to tell GMs how the NPCs would act and react).

I agree on communication and cooperation and a symbiotic relationship. But when there's a conflict, the FM has the final word on the portrayal of a faction.

Looking at the faction rights article, almost everything in it is already in the existing rules. I think I should merge them into the existing factions guide, to provide additional clarity. We need more clarity and communication.

@Fred:

But I won't tolerate having some high-D&D-game-designer like Mike Mearls come to me and tell me: no, that's not how you run gnolls. Fuck it. It's my table, with my players, and it's my time spent using assets I had at my disposal to entertain them. Who are you to tell me I'm not doing it right? What makes you so high and mighty that my NPCs aren't as good as your NPCs?

Okay, I understand that, but in your example you also don't start rewriting Mike's book content. Unlike D&D where your campaign has no effect on the canon in the books, Star Army's canon is affected and changed by each GM via the RP that's created. And in D&D the background NPCs aren't other people's characters (eg Yui). Here, you're part of something bigger than just your own story, and it's a two way street--plots affect the canon and the canon will change in ways that will sometimes affect your plot.

FMs should:

1) Be helpers to the GMs, interfering with GMs as little as reasonably possible
2) Improve the faction and keep it active
3) Be the go-to person and/or stand-in GM for RP threads that are not part of a GMed plot

 

[Wes]

Double post!

I also want to reinforce that background factions are not subject to these sort of faction rights and are freely usable by GMs. Only factions with players get faction managers. When a background faction is submitted, the creator should be doing it for the benefit of the site, not to be their avatar.

 

[Soresu]

Double post!

I also want to reinforce that background factions are not subject to these sort of faction rights and are freely usable by GMs. Only factions with players get faction managers. When a background faction is submitted, the creator should be doing it for the benefit of the site, not to be their avatar.

I can't agree to this to a point. If I take my time and go into detail on a faction I create, I expect to be able to have some considerations taken in its use. Information given and the like just like how any normal faction is portrayed and has been discussed in here already. I say this not to be greedy, or egotistical, but if I plan on running a plot with a faction I've made, but have kept it in the background for awhile... I don't want it to be steamrolled for the lulz and plot purposes before getting the chance to run a plot from it.

Mostly because I'd also face possible inconsistencies in how it was portrayed between the user's plot, and my own. So I believe even 'background' factions deserve some rights here, just like player factions. Otherwise I'd flat out refuse to finish any faction I start due to seeing it being treated as second hand.

It wouldn't be fair to the creator to say that just because your faction lacks players, they're automatically second class citizens and are considered a third world country. It never hurts to ask guys, nor does it hurt to ask for information or help in this regard to treat the players to a better experience, but also possibly give the faction some recognition/playerbase foundation building.

 

[Ira]

I do think that Background faction stuff needs to be established as well. They get benefits, but the person who did write the back ground faction should have the final say in what happens.

At the same time said NPC faction person should also be open to any GM who wishes to use them, provided they are not already predisposed and with in reason of course.

 

[Andrew]

Members' Intellectual Property

Taken from: Terms of Service

Your original creations here are your own and will remain your own property, but once you add them to Star Army, they're also the community's to use; by participating in the Star Army community, you agree to assign Star Army an irrevocable, non-exclusive, and royalty-free license to utilize the content you submit (such as wiki edits, forum posts, image uploads, and characters) giving Star Army the ability to use the material you contribute in the same way its owner would (including but not limited to public display, making derivative works, and using it in commercial works to raise funds for the Star Army community). This allows the other site members to build upon each others' ideas and also protects the site continuity by preventing anything from being suddenly removed

I think the Terms of Service actually applies to this - cause it is a an intellectual property issue. I highlight the line: Your original creations here are your own and will remain your own property, but once you add them to Star Army, they're also the community's to use

These terms of service apply to the site as a whole. It means when a faction is made, it becomes part of the SARPverse. It becomes part of the extant system and Game Masters have the right to use them, as if they were the owner. We are a community, and we shouldnt need to write a codified rule list of something that is expected - that being communication.

Now furthermore, what this really comes down to is using the established systems which Wes and Raz have stated. We dont need rules that tell people they need to communicate - that is what a community does. It is why we have faction planning and plot planning sections to facilitate transparency of plans for factions and plots.

A Game Master is bound by canon, we all are - faction managers, etc. But we are also bound by the perception of that canon. Everyone perceives something in a different way and that is where communicating comes into play. A GM is the director of the symphony to say, and some of the music is written by the faction managers, some is established in canon, and the rest is up to their creative resolve. Factions are protected by their established canon, and that is where it has always been.

If we begin micromanaging GMs, you will have a situation where GMs will be unwilling to use certain factions in their plot because dealing with the FMs will be too much of a headache. Also if an FM notices something being utilized wrong, they have the freedom to communicate that. again, both sides answer to canon.

So in conclusion, the systems are already here - our biggest protection of all is something that can't be codified into a rule, that being communication.

Remember, our foundation is the story...the established canon of the site.

 

[Kyle]

True that Andrew.

Mmm.. I do agree with Ira about the background factions with all honesty.

 

[Sigma]

And possibly some very prominant NPC's - when I think FM, I think like, Sigma...

I want to say that as flattered as I am to be considered an FM, I am not. I have sworn and continue swear fealty and service to the Great Moonicus Manus Maximus. He is the Nepleslian FM.

Now, here's my $0.02. As far as Nepleslia (as a faction) goes, I don't even understand how this issue arises. I have no communication trouble with MoonMan and we don't step on any toes. I cannot speak for Lam's plot but I don't believe he is having any of the aforementioned troubles. Ever since I became a GM for Nepleslia, it has been clear to me that the Faction Manager (and not myself) is the final authority on all things Nepleslian. It was, after all, the main reason for the departure of my predecessor. He did not like the fact that the FM had overriding authority. I am quite happy to be subordinate because I do not and will never claim to know all about Nepleslia. There are others who will always know far more about it than I will.

However, I know enough to present the flavor of it in the form of a Role Play. If I need to fill in any gaps or holes, I know who to turn to for aid.

I don't see the point in codifying what is already in place. The signatories (or at least, the primary drafter) claim that this will resolve an existing issue, which has been argued back and forth. Yet, not once have I seen an actual example of when the existing system failed us.

This sounds like an extremely hyped issue, which in reality, is a minor one. The amount of "OH GOD, IT'S BROKEN!" "NO, IT'S NOT!" seems much akin to the time when Uso came back and people kept telling me that he was gonna hijack the DREI AI currently being used by Nepleslia.

Ergo, I would ask that examples are provided to convince me that the existing system does not work. By which I mean text copy-pasted from their respective RP threads and highlighted here. Then, and ONLY then, can anyone accurately discuss whether the existing Gentleman's Agreement system works or does not work. And the onus must fall to the claimants who argue that the existing system is broken.

 

[Lamb]

I hate to change the subject away from... whatever this discussion has evolved to. However; this set of rules is very poorly thought out in terms of writing an air-tight set of regulations.

Some rules in it are arbitrary, while others are useless. The document conflicts with other rules already in place on the site in at least one manner, and at the later points becomes a tad redundant.

If this were a technology submission, I'd deny it.

Just saiyan.

 

[ShotJon]

We had some heated talking about this all on IRC, mainly me misunderstanding things. I will just paste one things that was said there and go again.

<Kampfer>GM-FM relationship should be a symbiotic one jesus christ.

That said, I think rules are not needed, but we need to start talking to each other. Hawgh.

 

[Wes]

I'm going to use the submission to enhance the current faction guide so it's more clear.

Also one thing I noticed is that a number of GMs and GMs have failed ot designate a co-FM. This is vital! You got to have a backup person that can cover for you when you're unavailable, otherwise communication and RP breaks down.

While there's always room to improve, I think communication has historically been pretty good on Star Army. For example, during the recent Lorath/Hanako/Gartagens incident, Tony and Doctomoe and I were in touch talking about it behind the scenes every day.

 

[ShotJon]

That is cool Wes, but I think what would help everyone was if you guys talked before-hand. Let's just make up an example.

I am a GM of Venus and I want it to visit the Abawehran space and maybe have it fight some of their pirates right? So before I do it, I send a PM to Matt and ask all about it to make sure everything will be cool and there will be no retcons needed later. Communication. That is the tool we have to use here.

 

[Wes]

I posit this question to everyone, based on Fred's post on page 3:

Should only GMs be allowed to create factions? Also, should that include only active GMs? Or should it also include FMs who want to provide antagonists for their faction? And what about people running RP threads outside of a plot forum?

 

[raz]

I don't know if "only GMs should be able to create factions" is necessarily correct. But the idea behind it — that people with demonstrated experience not only playing in the setting but running a story — is a good one. People running stuff outside of plot forums falls under this category.

So I guess "yes" in general with a few qualifications.

 

[Ira]

See I am mixed on this.

I do not want to stifle people's creativity. But at the same time I think earning your stripes should hold merit.

HOWEVER

Putting your time in, working heard, and getting NTSE approval does show dedication. So as far as making factions I think the process of it is kind of a gauntlet, a test to see if the writer is dead serious about what he is doing.


That said, I do think in order to become a player faction you need to fit some hard requirements, like a three player interest \. Having certain articles made,a certain level of ships...technology etc etc.